B GANGADHARAM Vs. D SIVA SANKAR REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent filed OS No.981 of 1999 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Banaganapalle, against the petitioner, for recovery of certain amount. THE suit was decreed on 31.8.2000. Initially, the respondent filed EP No. 125 of 2007. THE petitioner filed EA No.387 of 2008 raising objection as to maintainability of the E.P. It is stated that the said E.P. was dismissed. THE respondent filed EP No.91 of 2009 under Rule 37 of Order XXI CPC, for arrest of the petitioner. THE petitioner filed EA No.391 of 2010 under Section 151 CPC, with a prayer to dismiss the E.P. THE ground urged by him was that the notice under Rule 22 of Order XXI CPC, was not issued to him. THE Executing Court dismissed the E.A., through order dated 10.12.2010. Hence, this revision.

(2.) HEARD Sri R. Ramanjaneyulu, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) ONCE the judgment-debtor appears before the Court, almost a trial like, procedure needs to be followed. The decree- holder would be under obligation to prove that the judgment-debtor is in possession of adequate means and still is not paying the amount. Therefore, Rule 22 of Order XXI CPC, can not be made applicable to any execution petition filed under Rule 37 of Order XXI CPC, the reason being that a separate procedure altogether is prescribed for that set of proceedings. At any rate, the petitioner was served with notice and entered appearance. Insistence on further notice is almost meaningless.